Slideshare uses cookies to improve functionality and performance, and to provide you with relevant advertising. If you continue browsing the site, you agree to the use of cookies on this website. See our User Agreement and Privacy Policy.

Slideshare uses cookies to improve functionality and performance, and to provide you with relevant advertising. If you continue browsing the site, you agree to the use of cookies on this website. See our Privacy Policy and User Agreement for details.

Coja statement on_appointments

1.
COMMITTEE ON JUDICIAL ACCOUNTABILITY 66 Lawyers Chambers Supreme Court of India, New Delhi Members: Ram Jethmalani Shanti Bhushan Fali Nariman Rajinder Sachar D.S. Tewatia Anil B. Divan Indira Jaisingh Kamini Jaiswal Prashant Bhushan Arvind K. Nigam STATEMENTWe note that for the second time in quick succession, therecommendations of the collegium for the appointment of judges to theSupreme Court have been returned by the Government. In JusticeDinakaran’s case, some of the allegations against him have beensubsequently been confirmed by the District Magistrate, leading to animpeachment motion against him which has been admitted by theChairman of the Rajya Sabha.We are disturbed that recommendations have been made without anytransparency and without proper verification of the antecedents &reputation of those recommended.The committee strongly feels that responsible members of the bar of theconcerned High Courts should be consulted before the collegium makesany recommendation to the Government. Pending the constitution of a fulltime National Judicial Appointments Commission, we urge the SCcollegium to: a) Fashion after public debate, an open, accountable and participatory procedure for making recommendations for judicial appointments; and b) Not to recommend persons for appointment until the names have been made public, and members of the bar & public are enabled to share the relevant information that they might have about the proposed appointees with the collegium.